Network management can be divided into process management and design management. Design management concerns the institutional design of the network and sets conditions for those who are part of the network. Although a fair amount of research has been conducted in recent decades into the how process management can be analysed, less is known about the how the design of a network can be shaped and how design management influences the results of network collaboration. However, design management lays the foundation for the strategy of those in the network and can determine the effectiveness of a network. This contribution provides an impetus for an analysis framework to analyse and assess design management. The analysis framework is an interdisciplinary connection between administrative network management literature and legal literature. This analysis framework identifies the legal acts that actors have at their disposal as a core element of design management. The analysis framework makes a distinction between administrative law and private law legal acts, while these acts can affect the general or private interests of actors. The framework is illustrated based on two cases (both at the municipal level in the Netherlands) and it becomes clear that the effectiveness of a network collaboration is partly determined by the way in which design management is designed. The first case is the creation of a museum in the city centre; the second case involves the development of a residential area.

Progressing digitalisation, reinforced by the advance of sensor technology, has given an important impulse to the development of local monitors, which can be used to map policy-relevant trends in various policy areas periodically and/or in real time. Making optimal use of the information from monitoring for policy and implementation (‘effect’) remains an important challenge. This article examines the effect and impact of monitoring reports and user satisfaction surveys that were published by the Dutch Directorate-General for Public Works and Water Management’s (‘Rijkswaterstaat’) network monitoring teams in the period from 2015 to 2017. Specific questions include the nature and extent of the effect, critical success factors, the extent to which there is a learning, specific challenges and dilemmas that Rijkswaterstaat is confronted with and possible solutions for them. In this article, these questions are answered based on theoretical observations and practical insights that have been gathered when monitoring the network. The lessons and insights gathered are also relevant for actors who want to monitor policy and implementation more effectively at local and regional levels. An important lesson is that in (local) monitoring, the story behind the figures is very important for further interpretation of numerical trends. Data quality is an important precondition. An important political lesson is that the possibilities for adjusting policy are partly determined by dependency relationships of other (f)actors and the (political) receptivity to possible course changes as a result of signals from monitors. An important cultural lesson is that (local) monitoring can strengthen a common orientation on the identified (policy) challenges. A culture in which the focus is on learning rather than judgment is an important condition for effective follow-up.

In the two previous essays in this series, the author discussed the importance of legal and economic approaches for the (local) administrative sciences. More specifically, he addressed the question of the relationship between Public Administration and legal science and between Public Administration and economic science in more than a hundred years of (local) administrative sciences. This essay answers the same question for urban development, planning and geography, which can be divided into economic geography, human geography and political geography. These disciplines have in common that they concentrate on the spatial (territorial) dimension of public administration. Urban developer, Dirk Hudig, is the first of the twelve spatial scientists on whom the twelve narratives of this essay are based. In this essay the author will again divide the twelve main characters into four generations. He will then discuss the importance of the two geographers who have been most concerned with administrative geography: Adriaan Bours worked as an administrative geographer at the University of Amsterdam in the Public Administration department, Gerard Hoekveld took the initiative at Utrecht University in the geography department to develop a curriculum for a major in administrative geography. Finally, the author will discuss the importance of the emergence and development of the new environmental policy for Public Administration.

The Canon of Participation shows the development of Dutch participation in 27 illustrative and sometimes iconic stories. This shows how participation is a common thread throughout the Dutch political-administrative history. The canon looks at the context in which professionals in participation now work from a government perspective. We walk through history in seven-league boots. We always learn lessons for the future from the stories of the past. The previous issue of this magazine discussed the first 14 stories. This issue will present the remaining 13 stories. This is an adaptation of the Canon of Participation, which can be found at www.kennisknooppuntparticipatie.nl/canon. The online version of the canon contains more detailed descriptions, interpretation, background information, illustrations and source references. People can also respond to the canon in the online version, because just like participation itself, the canon is never fully developed. The canon was commissioned by the Participation Knowledge Exchange of the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management.